Background
It is not known if the loads and motions reported for instrumented knees are generalizable to a larger population of total knee replacement (TKR) patients. The purpose of this study is to: 1) report axial implant force data for chair and stair activities for a population of cruciate-retaining TKR patients and 2) compare the population forces to those measured with instrumented TKRs.
Methods
Twenty-three subjects with a cruciate-retaining TKR underwent motion analysis during stair ascending, stair descending, chair sitting, and chair rising activities after informed consent in this IRB approved study. Axial TKR forces were calculated using a previously validated computational model. Differences between the mean and variability of population instrumented TKR peak forces and force impulses were tested using t-tests and Levene’s test.
Results
Peak axial forces were 3.06, 2.74, 2.65, and 2.60 kN for stair ascent, stair descent, chair rising, and chair sitting, respectively. Force impulses were 123.3, 123.4, 153.5, and 154.0 kN*% activity cycle for stair ascent, stair descent, chair sitting, and chair rising, respectively. Population TKR and instrumented TKR peak forces were different for stair ascent (p=0.03) and stair descent (p=0.03) in the second half of the activity cycles. The variability of the peak forces and impulses were not different (p=0.106 to p=0.99)
Conclusion
The forces and motions presented in this study represent cruciate-retaining TKR patients and could be used for displacement-driven knee wear testing. The forces are similar to those in the literature from instrumented prostheses of an ultra-congruent cruciate-sacrificing TKR.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.